A simple model of the firms’ decision to pay workers performance related pay (PRP) is tested using company level data for 1,001 UK private sector businesses. From the basic sample statistics we observe that, on average, 26.5% of workers are covered by PRP systems. Yet this hides the fact that only 50.5% of businesses have any workers at all covered by PRP. Our empirical analysis offers support for the key hypotheses drawn from Lazear type PRP models, which emphasise the relations between firm size and implementation costs, and ease of measurement, as medium and large firms are more likely to have PRP systems. However, these results are over-turned when we consider the extent of workers covered by firm level PRP systems if they are in place. Here we observe that more workers are covered by PRP in micro and small firms.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number
1619.
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
Booth, A-L & Frank, J, 1997.
"Performance Related Pay,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
364, Centre for Economic Policy Research, Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University.
Other versions: